advertisement


Mono Cartridges?

foxwelljsly

Me too, I ate one sour too.
I am increasingly listening to more Mono records. As my turntable can be fitted with up to 3 arms, I am considering buying an armboard, a 9" arm and a mono MM cartridge which will connect to the MM stage in a Quad 34. This will cost around £600.

My stereo replay is via a AT33 PTG II, Roksan Nima and Jez's full-fat MC stage.

I assume these things exist for a reason, but I have never heard one. Is this worth it? Or will I be disappointed compared to the replay I get from the MC cart and stage I currently use?

cheers
 
You need to determine what type of mono recordings you have (old or newer) and make sure you get the correct stylus profile to match the grooves of your mono records. Also, depending on the EQ your mono records were cut at, you may require a phono stage (or pre-amp) with different equalisations to match the EQ's of your records, otherwise it's all a bit pointless...
 
Hearing mono records with my DL-102 was a bit of a revelation! The DL is a true mono cartridge, I'm less convinced by a lot of the 'mono' cartridges which are just internally strapped stereo models - I would have thought this is equivalent to using a stereo cartridge and pressing the mono button.

So current line up: AT33PGTii, DL-102 & AT-MONO3/SP for 78s
 
Am I right in thinking a mono cartridge can reduce the amount of surface noise? I can see this being quite handy on 60 year old LPs.

Would I get the same benefit by strapping a stereo cart? I have a few low-end MM cartridges I've considered strapping in the past but never gotten around to it...
 
Would I get the same benefit by strapping a stereo cart?

Yes. If you wire a stereo cartridge for mono, or put the amplifier in mono, then the vertical component of the surface noise is suppressed.
 
https://www.thakker.eu/tonabnehmer/...MIoJ7wnM778QIVBdiyCh1gXAjWEAQYASABEgKzuPD_BwE

I have this AT33 mono in a Dual 1229 and to me it makes good sense.
Especially if my preferred music, Jazz made a transition
from mono to stereo during the period that intestests me the most.

That means that many good old, but also partly re-pressings of good recordings are mono.
In some cases it's not even written on the record, but you have to find out yourself.

It's a different experience, seems to make even more sense,
though I have to say it is in no way disturbing or annoying if I played them stereo before.

But the difference is interesting and I like it a lot.

The new release of Miles Davis- Blue Moods that came out in 2021 is a very good pressing for example,
but it is mono...and no sign of that on the cover anywhere.

I don't wanna bore you with 'snap into place' cliches too much, but it is quite a bit like that.
You instantly get how it's really supposed to sound and does make a bit more sense then.

And you should really avoid playing a stereo record on a mono cart.

@foxwelljsly : in short...with your setup, you won't be disappointed.
 
Last edited:
It is quite possible that a mono cartridge will damage not only a Stereo record, but also a mono record that was cut with a Stereo cutting head. I opted for a Mono Cartridge with some vertical compliance as most of my Mono records are late 50's, early 60's or reissues and it is quite likely the majority were cut with a Stereo cutting head. For these equalisation is also not really a problem as most record labels had moved to RIAA by the start of the 60's after RIAA equalisation was introduced around 1954. I think most modern Mono cartridges have a least some vertical compliance but the otherwise excellent Miyajima range for instance do not so worth checking. I do know of one person who has used a Miyajima on stereo head cuts and he claims without any damage.

In my case I opted for a Ortofon Cadenza Mono as a it is good tonal match for my Stereo Cadenza Bronze and as it has some vertical compliance as I did not want to risk record damage. Some claim that Mono Cartridges with no vertical compliance give even better sound and suppress even more surface noise so if you are sure convinced all your Mono records are prior Stereo cutting heads then they may be the best choice. I still think a good proper mono cartridge even with vertical compliance is a real step up in sound quality from a stereo cartridge switched to mono or a cartridge only strapped to mono.
 
It is quite possible that a mono cartridge will damage not only a Stereo record, but also a mono record that was cut with a Stereo cutting head. I opted for a Mono Cartridge with some vertical compliance as most of my Mono records are late 50's, early 60's or reissues and it is quite likely the majority were cut with a Stereo cutting head. For these equalisation is also not really a problem as most record labels had moved to RIAA by the start of the 60's after RIAA equalisation was introduced around 1954. I think most modern Mono cartridges have a least some vertical compliance but the otherwise excellent Miyajima range for instance do not so worth checking. I do know of one person who has used a Miyajima on stereo head cuts and he claims without any damage.

In my case I opted for a Ortofon Cadenza Mono as a it is good tonal match for my Stereo Cadenza Bronze and as it has some vertical compliance as I did not want to risk record damage. Some claim that Mono Cartridges with no vertical compliance give even better sound and suppress even more surface noise so if you are sure convinced all your Mono records are prior Stereo cutting heads then they may be the best choice. I still think a good proper mono cartridge even with vertical compliance is a real step up in sound quality from a stereo cartridge switched to mono or a cartridge only strapped to mono.

Hi Jim..

Cadenza Mono is very nice...a different league though..
What deck & arm do you use it in ?

I don't think you can damage a mono pressing that has been cut with a stereo cutting head.
The stereo cutting heads were used bc no innovations were going into mono cutting heads anymore,
and second..mono cutting heads were no more available.
So, paradoxially...bc stereo cutting heads were improved in terms of lower distortion and many other factors,
the stereo heads made better mono pressings.

https://pure-analogue.com/the-cutting-lathe/

I quote from the above:

'This happens for reasons of compatibility with commercially available cartridges, but also because mono cutter heads are practically no longer existent.
Therefore, no special mono cartridges are necessary. Still, they are quite practical, because with a mono needle, the record’s inherent surface noise is substantially reduced.'

So, definitely no harm playing a stereo-head cut mono pressing with a mono cart..in the contrary.

No reason to break your head about if the pressing was cut with a Neumann 80 stereo head or whatever else...your Cadenza Mono is always the best way to go..
..did I say that's a nice cart..? :)
 
0.7 or 1.0mil stylus ideal

Ortofon true Mono cartridges range
0.7mil is Suitable for Reissue Monaural LP and a Mono LP of after 1960.
1.0mil is Suitable for the Monaural LP of a deep groove of the first press of the 1950s.
However, both styli can trace the monaural LP of all generations without a problem.
When you listen to the monaural LP of all generations, we recommend 0.7mil.
When you listen to a monaural LP of the first press of the 1950s mainly, we recommend 1.0mil.
3.0mil usually ideal for 78rpm mono records
 
Hi Torstoi,
Turntable I use is a 40 year old, owned by me from new, Trio / Kenwood L-07D with its own arm used for my Cadenza Mono and an added SME V in a second position for the Cadenza Bronze.
https://www.tannoyista.com/2020/05/the-triokenwood-l-07d-turntable.html

A stereo head cuts both lateral and vertical to achieve both channels, but I think in most cases you are right if it is making a mono cut with a stereo head as although the head has two coils mounted at right angles, instead of just one coil with a mono cutting head, one coil should be out of phase so that it should still just cut a lateral groove. Still I would rather be on the safe side though.

There are still a few people using true mono cutting heads still for mono issues. The Electric Recording Company does for their mono reissues: https://theelectricrecordingco.com/about/uk
and Bernie Grundman is rumoured to have one as well.
 
Last edited:
thx, the L-07D is an old dream of mine btw... ticks every box I can think of.. :)
I think this one is one I'll never get to, but absolutely adore them !

The AT33 mono I have, I put into the Dual 1229 to initially try and see what this mono thing is all about and if it would turn out worth further exploring.
Once my focus was on that aspect, I was astonished there were more mono or mono-based recordings in my collection than I had thought.

I'll keep that Cadenza mono in mind, but even the AT33 will probably do better with a better arm than the Dual & the deck itself the same.
I think a good arm with changeable HS & a Lenco or Technics would do very well.
 
Torstoi,
Nothing wrong with the AT33 Mono and for most users who play monos more than good enough. You are quite likely to get quite a bit more from with an upgraded deck and arm so money would probably be better spent there if you are looking for improvements.

Initially the AT33 Mono was the one I was also considering. Before that I was playing my monos with a stereo Denon 103 that has a conical stylus and it sounded pretty good. A quick check made me realise I play monos about 25% of the time so it was worth spending a reasonable amount without going to the expense of something like the better Miyajimas and I had the above mentioned reservations about them. My Cadenza Blue stereo had come to the end of its life and I was able to get an improved deal buying a Cadenza Bronze and Mono at the same time with the added advantage of a close tonal match from the cartridges. So I decided to Go for these two.

I did have some initial problems in that I could not totally eliminate at least some low level Hum with the mono when fed into my MC phono module no matter how I altered the earthing arrangements. Finally fully cured by using the SUT I have into the MM stage instead with the Earth lift switched in. I'm now more than satisfied with the combination in my system.
 
Last edited:
I inherited a load of mono records a few years back, mostly classical but some jazz. I had a Naim Aro and an Elite Rock available that I no longer used in my main system but when I did I dispensed with the trough, outrigger and paddle when using a DV17d2. For the mono discs I decided a (London) Decca would be interesting to try, so I ordered a maroon wired for mono. With my inherited original mono discs the combination worked very well, the cartridge has a horizontal compliance of around 15 but a vertical compliance of 10 or so, with no vertical component in the signal the Aro was fine and the Decca gave a very lively sound. When I came to put a reissue of some Schnabel Beethoven recordings on, the stylus promptly jumped out of the groove, the same happened with other reissued mono recordings. The leaflet that came with the cartridge suggested an arm with an effective mass of between 18 and 25g, the Aro is no where near that but with the outrigger and paddle comes to around 15-16, add in the effect of the damping trough and I can now play mono reissues (mostly) without unwanted drama on this setup.
Compared to playing mono discs on my Schröder/SPU Royal N, the Decca is usually preferable but there have been a couple of mono discs where the stereo SPU is more convincing.
 
Sorry to revive an older thread, but looking into mono cartridges lately (preferably with a bayonet mount to eschew a headshell). Have no "old" mono records, only modern reissues.

I looked over to the Ortofon SPU camp, but am confused about their offering.

It seems that they only have two models with a 1.0mil stylus (25um), the SPU Mono G MKII, and the SPU Mono CG 25 Di MKII.

Apart from the output level, has anyone an idea what is the difference between these two?

I am also baffled by the fact that they do not seem to have a low output mono SPU for some reason.

Anyway, not married to an SPU, but I do like how they sound - so if any other options are available - I would be happy to hear about them. Vastly prefer MC, however. I may look into the Audio Technica line, but trying to avoid it due to a very, very difficult to deal with local dealer.
 
I would strongly suggest you look at the Miyajima Labs mono cartridges. Mono doesn't get any better than when using one of their cartridges.
 
Thank you.

I might look into Miyajima, but there is the whole headshell aspect again, and there are no local dealers. :(

But if I do manage to figure out a way to purchase the Miyajima, which headshell would you suggest for it on a SME 3012?
 
https://www.tedeska.com/products/

https://www.emt-tontechnik.ch/cartridges

https://thomas-schick.com/en/produkte/graphite-headshell

That should wet your appetite, Thomas Schick also makes headshells in wood and resin....

https://www.coolgales.com/?s=Headshell+&post_type=product

Of course there's lots of other headshells available in a wide range of materials and weights, I'm sure it's a case of picking the appropriate headshell weight to go along with your tonearms effective mass to work with the compliance of your chosen cartridge.
 
The Miyajima mono MCs are true mono cartridges with no vertical compliance.
This massively reduces surface noise (from any residual crud in the grooves)
They also sound fantastic with a front to back layering which makes you wonder why anyone bothered with stereo….
Having changed to a single arm TT I’m moving on from my Zero (FS) but have really enjoyed it….
 
  • Like
Reactions: GT


advertisement


Back
Top